The durability of the Falcon was not a real issue after XM, nor a perceived one once the XP had firstly established its credentials with the press via the Durability Run and secondly with the buying public, led by the fleets. Indeed, by XA time the Falcon was successfully promoted as the Great Australian Road Car.
So the failures notched up after the early 1960s were not to do with cars failing to handle Australian conditions but instead with design priorities.
There can be no doubt that many drivers scared themselves in EF Falcons. The EF was developed by a committee. Indeed, the front and rear suspension systems felt as if they were designed for different cars.
Great emphasis was given to refinement and this meant softer bushings were used in the front suspension to tune out as much noise and harshness as possible. Much of the work that had gone into making the EB and ED such accurate and predictable handling cars was lost in the pursuit of silence.
The EF turned into a corner quite well and then you felt as if you had to unwind a little lock as the roll oversteer kicked in; any correlation between the front suspension and the rear was coincidental.
The XRs were better but still not right. The cheapest versions on lesser tyres were nasty. In inexpert hands and especially on a wet road, the EF could quite easily swap ends. Many did.
The story of the AU's inadequacies is better known but still worth retelling briefly.
In the mid-1990s the Ford world was gripped with New Edge fever. The AU Falcon was designed in this context. Within Ford Australia the doubters were legion but they were silenced, often with scorn. One PR person commented on the car's bum-up stance. 'What are your credentials as a designer,' was the response he received from a very senior product development executive.
Even before the AU's release, the PR team and the marketing department, as well as many senior engineers, knew they faced a problem convincing the media and, more importantly, the public.
Bravely (stupidly?) we members of the press were told by supercilious executives that if we didn't like the look of the car yet that was because it was in advance of its time and we would grown to appreciate it. A few did; more did not. And journalists don't like being told by automotive executives what to think.
It was not just the shape of the car that was the problem but the way it was presented. You only have to compare an XR variant with a standard issue taxi in awful Victorian Taxi Yellow. Large-diameter alloys, a rear spoiler and a 20 mm lowering of ride height went a long way to fixing the visuals but it was too late with the rental fleets and taxi companies setting swarms of bog standard Falcons loose on the roads.
For the ordinary punter, the VT Commodore looked great (or cool) and the Falcon looked hideous (or crook).
The interior was a disaster on the lower spec models with ill-matching greys in several funereal shades, nasty plastics and a built-down-to-a-price feel. The fact that these materials would last forever was actually a negative!
What got lost in all this was that the AU Falcon actually drove better than its Commodore rival. It had excellent steering and far superior torque.
There were other advantages such as the split-fold rear seat, superior automatic transmission and much more advanced independent rear suspension on up-spec variants.
But who could blame prospective readers for judging this book by its bleak cover?
Read the latest Carsales Network news and reviews on your mobile, iPhone or PDA at www.carsales.mobi